From the Instagram model advertising gifted products to the geek blogger paid to review video games, influencer advertising is now everywhere. Digital marketing is rapidly evolving (the world even saw its first CGI influencer earlier this year), and regulators are adapting accordingly.

Bill C-86, the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 2, (the “Bill”) which makes a number of changes to the Trademarks Act, the Patent Act and the Copyright Act as well as introducing the College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents Act became law in Canada after receiving Royal Assent on Dec. 13, 2018.

I’ve been studying fraud and white collar-crime for over 20 years. Never would I think that I’d be accused of making a fraudulent claim against a company that had wronged me. And yet, I’ve recently been accused of exactly that.

Who is taking cyber risk? Is it the board and top management who are deciding how much scarce resource to invest in breach prevention, detection and response? Or is it the business leaders whose initiatives are damaged or worse should there be a security incident?

Privacy compliance is top of mind, not the least of all because of GDRP and Canada’s new mandatory breach notification rules. While you are updating your practices and procedures, do not forget that the Guidelines for obtaining meaningful consent (the “Guidelines”) will apply starting on January 1, 2019.

On October 25, the Government of Canada tabled significant amendments to the Official Languages (Communications with and Services to the Public) Regulations. As discussed previously, this regulatory overhaul stems from commitments made in the 2018 federal budget plan to improve access to services offered in the language of the official minority by federal institutions from coast to coast.

On December 6, 2018, the legislature again introduced new changes to the statutory labour and employment regime of the province. While Bill 66, Restoring Ontario’s Competitiveness Act (“Bill 66”), makes changes to a wide swath of laws, the ESA and the LRA are subject to some new tweaks.

The issues to be determined by the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) in this highly anticipated decision included whether the doctrine of unforeseeability (hardship) was an integral part of Québec law, or the requirements of good faith and equity could provide a legal basis for the claims made by CFLCo.

A recent decision from the Ontario Court of Appeal (ONCA) adds to the growing body of Canadian case law confirming that tweets certainly can be libelous, though protections exist for comments on matters the court finds to be of public interest, including through anti-SLAPP legislation.